I've given a number of long winded responses on a number of topics. The one in question, DeRozan, has been beat to death - which I acknowledge having played a large part in. I'm tired of it. You're a homer with a bigger man crush on DeRozan. That is cool. I've been wrong before and, hell, maybe I'm wrong now. We'll see.

This is a DeMar DeRozan thread... if you don't want to respond to the evidence I presented with evidence to the contrary, then just leave.

I also think it's hilarious that you assume I'm a DeMar homer just because I'm trying to defend him. He isn't even my favourite player on the team for starters. But if it makes you feel better to dismiss my arguments as homerism or satisfaction with mediocrity, then so be it. Just don't complain when I present facts that make you look clueless.

Matt52, I'm trying to reform myself in my attitude with you, but this kind of stuff makes it hard, man. Whether it was Bargnani, or now DeMar, you keep initiating the same arguments over and over again, which is exactly what my "burr in the saddle" has been with you, with a secondary gripe being this "I've had my fill" line coming when someone presents something factual that trips you. Sorry, but that's how it seems anyway.

No problem, p00ka. I appreciate a civil response.

But I'm really tired of the same arguments. Did I initiate? Possibly. Are people making the same comments over and over that I've replied to in the past? Possibly. Discussion is two ways. I've had my fill means the discussion is going in circles, in my opinion. I feel like I'm saying the same things over and over which you just confirmed. In fact, wasn't it you and Xixak just a few weeks ago telling me to quit? Well, here goes boys, I am quitting this topic. Nothing here has tripped me, I just no longer care to debate it.

Question: was it Bargnani before this last season or Bargnani that showed up for this year? Reason being I recall you being very polite and in agreement with many of the things I typed whether in these forums or on the homepage. Unfortunately I had a revelation that there comes a point in time when a player is what he is. It really has changed my view on things. Hope and potential is good for a year or two and then it is you have what you have - especially when we get in to the 23/24 age range (barring major role change, trade, or coaching change). You seem to have taken quite negatively (as long as a number of other posters over the last 10 months or so) to this change in view.

I'm sorry my new views are not relished and cheered by you. However I'm tired of cheering for a losing team and hoping for an average team. It is my opinion DeRozan is part of the problem moving forward given the numerous amount of games I've watched and statistics I've come across. It is also my opinion the majority have been so conditioned to losing that they are willing to throw away the chance of a lifetime (AS potential C just 21 years of age to build around) to MAYBE make a playoff berth.

So here is another long winded response and hopefully I never enter a DeRozan discussion until the season starts.

But I'm really tired of the same arguments. Did I initiate? Possibly. Are people making the same comments over and over that I've replied to in the past? Possibly. Discussion is two ways. I've had my fill means the discussion is going in circles, in my opinion. I feel like I'm saying the same things over and over which you just confirmed. In fact, wasn't it you and Xixak just a few weeks ago telling me to quit? Well, here goes boys, I am quitting this topic. Nothing here has tripped me, I just no longer care to debate it.

Question: was it Bargnani before this last season or Bargnani that showed up for this year? Reason being I recall you being very polite and in agreement with many of the things I typed whether in these forums or on the homepage. Unfortunately I had a revelation that there comes a point in time when a player is what he is. It really has changed my view on things. Hope and potential is good for a year or two and then it is you have what you have - especially when we get in to the 23/24 age range (barring major role change, trade, or coaching change). You seem to have taken quite negatively (as long as a number of other posters over the last 10 months or so) to this change in view.

I'm sorry my new views are not relished and cheered by you. However I'm tired of cheering for a losing team and hoping for an average team. It is my opinion DeRozan is part of the problem moving forward given the numerous amount of games I've watched and statistics I've come across. It is also my opinion the majority have been so conditioned to losing that they are willing to throw away the chance of a lifetime (AS potential C just 21 years of age to build around) to MAYBE make a playoff berth.

So here is another long winded response and hopefully I never enter a DeRozan discussion until the season starts.

You know, I'm not taking sides here, but I think you need to step away from the keyboard the next time you are inclined to call anyone else out as a "douche" on this forum. The tone in many of your posts is as bad or worse than the people you are calling out... It's become pretty clear you have a particular ax to grind with Matt52, and it makes you look bad.

(ie. He never mentions Derozan as "preventing us from building around Val", just that he's "part of the problem" he sees with the current roster; you cherry-picked and changed what he said for the sole purpose of starting another argument...)

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

This is a DeMar DeRozan thread... if you don't want to respond to the evidence I presented with evidence to the contrary, then just leave.

I also think it's hilarious that you assume I'm a DeMar homer just because I'm trying to defend him. He isn't even my favourite player on the team for starters. But if it makes you feel better to dismiss my arguments as homerism or satisfaction with mediocrity, then so be it. Just don't complain when I present facts that make you look clueless.

I do know the Raptors were under .500 to end the year after trade.

Again if settling is your thing, awesome.

Personally I'm tired of hoping veterans improve to go to the next level or making excuses why they didn't do this or that. It is possible but is the rare exception.

According to PER, JR Smith has a better PER than Paul George. Individual people then extrapolate as they please.

Rofl ok.

PER is supposed to be an all-encompassing metric (except it basically ignores non-statistical defense). So using it solely and nothing else in a vacuum would tell you JR Smith > Paul George as a player.

I'm not settling on anything. I didn't even say we HAD to keep DeRozan.

You said he's a below-average player, yet have provided no proof for it.

There have been many arguments made and many statistics stated in multiple threads both in favor and opposed to this type of argument. Just because you don't agree/accept a particular point of view, please respect the opinion of others. No posters are required to prove anything to you, or state an opinion in such a way that satisfies you.

Xixak wrote:

Rofl ok.

PER is supposed to be an all-encompassing metric (except it basically ignores non-statistical defense). So using it solely and nothing else in a vacuum would tell you JR Smith > Paul George as a player.

Guess I have to word it like that for you guys.

I get the feeling he was simply pointing out the fact that statistics say nothing on their own; it's only when subjective 'facts' are extrapolated from otherwise objective data, that any sort of conclusion is reached or 'proof' found. It's ironic that you use statistics as the basis to defend your position on DeRozan (and demand others to do the same to disprove your opinion, as though you are right until proven wrong), then "Rofl" when similar statistics point out such a flawed (at least from your perspective) conclusion when comparing two other players. How can stats be so correct in one instance, yet such a joke in another? Tit for tat, no?

PER is supposed to be an all-encompassing metric (except it basically ignores non-statistical defense).

It isn't supposed to be anything. It is exactly what it is. It's a complex amalgam of several commonly found stats. The man who created it would never, ever tell you to use it to decide if player A is "better" than player B.

There have been many arguments made and many statistics stated in multiple threads both in favor and opposed to this type of argument. Just because you don't agree/accept a particular point of view, please respect the opinion of others. No posters are required to prove anything to you, or state an opinion in such a way that satisfies you.

I get the feeling he was simply pointing out the fact that statistics say nothing on their own; it's only when subjective 'facts' are extrapolated from otherwise objective data, that any sort of conclusion is reached or 'proof' found. It's ironic that you use statistics as the basis to defend your position on DeRozan (and demand others to do the same to disprove your opinion, as though you are right until proven wrong), then "Rofl" when similar statistics point out such a flawed (at least from your perspective) conclusion when comparing two other players. How can stats be so correct in one instance, yet such a joke in another? Tit for tat, no?

It isn't supposed to be anything. It is exactly what it is. It's a complex amalgam of several commonly found stats. The man who created it would never, ever tell you to use it to decide if player A is "better" than player B.

Did you even go back to see how the discussion started? Another poster said it's useless. I said that's a stretch and then mentioned how it rates JR Smith as better than Paul George, with the point being that used in isolation... yes it can sometimes be useless or non-factual.

Obviously PER has use when paired with other statistics and perspectives.

Did you even go back to see how the discussion started? Another poster said it's useless. I said that's a stretch and then mentioned how it rates JR Smith as better than Paul George, with the point being that used in isolation... yes it can sometimes be useless or non-factual.

Obviously PER has use when paired with other statistics and perspectives.

Isn't that what Matt52 (and others) have done when offering an analysis of DeRozan that differs from your own?

#2 DeRozan doesn't have the skill set to be an efficient go to scorer.

#3 Who is talking about trading DD for a 3+D player to take 15 shots per game? I believe people are talking about getting a player with a better skill set relative to his contract and/or getting a better player to mesh with the players currently under contract. Does DeRozan's skill set mesh well with a punch and kick Lowry? Nope. A similar Gay? Nope. A hustle and grunt Amir? Nope. A post up/screen roller JV? Nope.

Bold: You forget that offense is just 50% of the game and the other 50% is what wins championships.

Matt52 wrote:

I've been called worse by better.... so there you go. But thanks anyways.

My BOOM showed you're a fan of mediocrity. You have done nothing to show DeRozan is not what I say: an average at best SG who settles for long 2s and is mediocre on defense. You are striving for a below average player to become average to a little above while making 2x the average player and over 3x the median. You are the classic Raptor fan which I myself was for many years.

You keep spinning whatever fantasies you need to convince yourself whatever about what DeRozan will become. I've been down this road. It doesn't end where you hope.

Bold 2: I'm the one who is happy to go in whatever direction but would prefer to part with Lowry and Gay. Why do I care? Because the Raptors are screwed with DeRozan one way or another. If they tank, he's already shown he can't handle being the guy and does nothing to help the team now. If they compete, he doesn't mesh with the talent currently under contract.

Matt52 wrote:

Circles. That is all this is. I'm tired of it. I bet others are too. We'll all see soon enough. I hope nothing but the best for DD but I'm not betting on it.

Matt52 wrote:

Sure.

When you get up to 13,600 posts, lets see how willing you are to engage in the same argument over and over.

I've had my fill.

If you want to proclaim victory, go right ahead.

Matt52 wrote:

Is this the "Signs of Tanking" thread?

Is this the same topic of conversation as there?

I've given a number of long winded responses on a number of topics. The one in question, DeRozan, has been beat to death - which I acknowledge having played a large part in. I'm tired of it. You're a homer with a bigger man crush on DeRozan. That is cool. I've been wrong before and, hell, maybe I'm wrong now. We'll see.

Matt52 wrote:

No problem, p00ka. I appreciate a civil response.

But I'm really tired of the same arguments. Did I initiate? Possibly. Are people making the same comments over and over that I've replied to in the past? Possibly. Discussion is two ways. I've had my fill means the discussion is going in circles, in my opinion. I feel like I'm saying the same things over and over which you just confirmed. In fact, wasn't it you and Xixak just a few weeks ago telling me to quit? Well, here goes boys, I am quitting this topic. Nothing here has tripped me, I just no longer care to debate it.

Question: was it Bargnani before this last season or Bargnani that showed up for this year? Reason being I recall you being very polite and in agreement with many of the things I typed whether in these forums or on the homepage. Unfortunately I had a revelation that there comes a point in time when a player is what he is. It really has changed my view on things. Hope and potential is good for a year or two and then it is you have what you have - especially when we get in to the 23/24 age range (barring major role change, trade, or coaching change). You seem to have taken quite negatively (as long as a number of other posters over the last 10 months or so) to this change in view.

I'm sorry my new views are not relished and cheered by you. However I'm tired of cheering for a losing team and hoping for an average team. It is my opinion DeRozan is part of the problem moving forward given the numerous amount of games I've watched and statistics I've come across. It is also my opinion the majority have been so conditioned to losing that they are willing to throw away the chance of a lifetime (AS potential C just 21 years of age to build around) to MAYBE make a playoff berth.

So here is another long winded response and hopefully I never enter a DeRozan discussion until the season starts.

Matt52 wrote:

I do know the Raptors were under .500 to end the year after trade.

Again if settling is your thing, awesome.

Personally I'm tired of hoping veterans improve to go to the next level or making excuses why they didn't do this or that. It is possible but is the rare exception.

Umm no actually since I posted in here in response to P00ka Matt hasn't mentioned a single statistic other than his 13,600 posts:

The arguments have been made many times by Matt52 and others (myself included), including a myriad of statistical support. The fact that he didn't respond directly to you in this particular thread, does not make the existing arguments any less valid. To challenge other posters in such a condescending manner, when they have already done exactly what you're asking for multiple times, is bordering on being a little ignorant. Go do some digging in the other threads where this debate has already been had, if it matters that much to you.

EDIT: I'll go through and post some links to those threads when I get a chance, so you can familiarize yourself with the past debates, including lots of solid, statistically supported arguments both for and against DeRozan.

The arguments have been made many times by Matt52 and others (myself included), including a myriad of statistical support. The fact that he didn't respond directly to you in this particular thread, does not make the existing arguments any less valid. To challenge other posters in such a condescending manner, when they have already done exactly what you're asking for multiple times, is bordering on being a little ignorant. Go do some digging in the other threads where this debate has already been had, if it matters that much to you.

EDIT: I'll go through and post some links to those threads when I get a chance, so you can familiarize yourself with the past debates, including lots of solid, statistically supported arguments both for and against DeRozan.